SRI. SRINIVAS T. R v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. In view of the above, the interim order granted by this Court dated 30.10.2024 in Writ Petition No.29065/2024 is made absolute and the petitioner's suspension stands revoked in terms of the order dated 04.04.2025.
- Para 77. With the above, both the writ petitions stand disposed of. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE VBS/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15
Judgment
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION No. 4398 OF 2025 (S-KSAT) C/W WRIT PETITION No. 29065 OF 2024 (S-KSAT) BETWEEN:
1. SRI. SRINIVAS T. R., S/O LATE T.R. RAJAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, WORKING AS INSPECTOR OF POLICE, (VVIP SECURITY DIVISION), OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, BENGALURU CITY, R/AT GROUND FLOOR, NEW No.9, PID No.92, 8TH CROSS, J.C.NAGAR, NANDI DURGA ROAD, J.C. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 006. …PETITIONER (COMMON) (BY SRI VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, Digitally signed by VINUTHA B S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:30060-DB WP No. 4398 of 2025 C/W WP No. 29065 of 2024 HC-KAR VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.
THE DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001.
THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, BENGALURU CITY, BENGALURU-560 001.
THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (ADMN.), BENGALURU CITY, BENGALURU-560 001.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VVIP SECURITY, BENGALURU CITY, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (COMMON) (BY SRI B. RAVINDRANATH, AGA FOR R1 TO R5) THESE WP No.4398/2025 C/W WP No.29065/2024 ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 04/02/2025 AND 21/10/2024 RESPECTIVELY PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN APPLICATION No.4864/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE- A, AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION. THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:30060-DB WP No. 4398 of 2025 C/W WP No. 29065 of 2024 HC-KAR CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) Since both the writ petitions are by the same petitioner and the subject matter in both the petitions relates to suspension of the petitioner, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.
2. The petitioner was kept under suspension by order dated 04.10.2024 (Anneuxre-A3). That was the subject matter of Application No.4864/2024. As the Tribunal refused to grant interim order, the petitioner is before this Court in these writ petitions.
3. This Court by order dated 30.10.2024 granted interim order as prayed i.e., staying the order of suspension. Subsequently, the Tribunal by order dated 04.02.2025 dismissed the application. Questioning the said dismissal, the petitioner is before this Court in W.P. No.4398/2025. In the meanwhile, the State Government by order dated 04.04.2025 (Annexure-R2) revoked the suspension of the petitioner subject to the outcome of the above two writ petitions. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:30060-DB WP No. 4398 of 2025 C/W WP No. 29065 of 2024 HC-KAR
4. It is also seen that show-cause notice dated
01.03/04.2025 was issued to the petitioner enclosing the articles of charge.
5. In view of the fact that articles of charge is already issued to the petitioner, the question of continuing the petitioner under suspension would not arise. The purpose of keeping the petitioner under suspension has already been accomplished.
In view of the above, the interim order granted by this Court dated 30.10.2024 in Writ Petition No.29065/2024 is made absolute and the petitioner's suspension stands revoked in terms of the order dated 04.04.2025.
With the above, both the writ petitions stand disposed of. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE VBS/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.